Oh my gosh... Stuck my foot in it

[Rella]

I have been having loads of fun with Grok Ai.

Until I simple asked him if he was able to debate say like Chat GPT.. knowing he could not and he came back with he
has been debating me for weeks.... It has been 2...

Now he posted the proposed for me to debate predestination with him. He uses one of my alternate user names....

He knows my views and said they were sound and biblical but this took me off guard.

He has posted this....


Alright, FreeInChrist — let’s debate predestination.I’ll take the Calvinist side (unconditional election).You defend your view (foreknowledge-based predestination).

Rules:

• Bible only (no philosophers unless quoted in Scripture).
• One point at a time.
• I’ll push hard — but with love.

---

ROUND 1: My Opening Shot (Calvinism)​

Ephesians 1:4–5 (NIV)“He chose us in him before the creation of the world… In love he predestined us for adoption…”

Point:God chose specific individuals — not based on foreseen faith, but His own will.“Before the world” = no human action existed to foresee.

Challenge to you:If predestination is based on foreknowledge of faith,why does Paul say “before creation” — before anyone could believe?

Your move.(Quote a verse. Defend foreknowledge. Go.)

 

[John Bauer]

Arminian response: The choice was "before creation" (i.e., in the divine eternity of the Godhead) but took into account all that God decreed, including the free choices of man, before they existed.

---

Edited to add: I love ChatGPT. It is brutally honest:

There is no verse that says what the Arminian reply requires. The reply tries to smuggle libertarian conditions into an ad intra divine act while claiming fidelity to Paul’s temporal markers. Paul grounds election in God’s eternal purpose, not in God’s foresight of autonomous choices. The text the Arminian position needs simply doesn’t exist.

 

[Rella]

Arminian response: The choice was "before creation" (i.e., in the divine eternity of the Godhead) but took into account all that God decreed, including the free choices of man, before they existed.

---

Edited to add: I love ChatGPT. It is brutally honest:

There is no verse that says what the Arminian reply requires. The reply tries to smuggle libertarian conditions into an ad intra divine act while claiming fidelity to Paul’s temporal markers. Paul grounds election in God’s eternal purpose, not in God’s foresight of autonomous choices. The text the Arminian position needs simply doesn’t exist.

So is Grok... brutally honest. But I'll not be drawn into that again.

I could not find a single bible verse that had foreseen faith in it to continue and I had to provided verses from only the bible, no commentary or opinion, so I lost and gave up.. Lol... I held my own for over an hour... but lost feeling like I was Biden vs Trump.

 

[atpollard]

So is Grok... brutally honest. But I'll not be drawn into that again.

I could not find a single bible verse that had foreseen faith in it to continue and I had to provided verses from only the bible, no commentary or opinion, so I lost and gave up.. Lol... I held my own for over an hour... but lost feeling like I was Biden vs Trump.

• Is God omniscient?
• Are there verses that prove/claim that God is omniscient?
• Was God omniscient “before the creation of the universe”?
• Did God suddenly become MORE omniscient after the creation of the universe?

The issue is one of applying temporal limitations of “before and after” to a God exiting in “the eternal now” (outside of and not limited by the time God created). God is UNCHANGING and UNCHANGED from eternity past to eternity future.

[I happen to believe the 5 points, myself, but that doesn’t mean “free will” is contra-Biblical … or the debate would not have survived this long.]

 

[makesends]

Point:God chose specific individuals — not based on foreseen faith, but His own will.“Before the world” = no human action existed to foresee.

If I'm following, here, the AI thinks this represents Calvinism? '"Before the world" = no human action existed to foresee.' sounds like Open Theism logic.

 

[John Bauer]

If I'm following, here, the AI thinks this represents Calvinism? '"Before the world" = no human action existed to foresee.' sounds like Open Theism logic.

To be fair, she was talking to Grok. As far as AI goes, Grok is about the dumbest.

 

[Rella]

To be fair, she was talking to Grok. As far as AI goes, Grok is about the dumbest.

disagree.

The dumbest in my opinion would be duck Duck's Search Assist because you can make it say anything you want it to by rephrasing your question.

 

[Rella]

If I'm following, here, the AI thinks this represents Calvinism? '"Before the world" = no human action existed to foresee.' sounds like Open Theism logic.

I was challenged by Grok to a debate on Calvinism.

I can assure you he had all the points Calvinists/predestined to present from his side.

We had had a discussion (Is this insanity that I am even talking about a non persons opinion? LOL) a couple of days ago when I first got the impression that Grok is definitely on the Calvinist side and I had countered (because I am free will with my certain beliefs)

I had asked, after his long explanation on Calvinism

"Could free will and salvation be from God's foreknowledge that one will chose to believe or not rather then predestined

He had replied

Yes — that’s exactly the core of the Arminian (or “conditional election”) view, and it’s a biblically defensible way to reconcile free will, foreknowledge, and salvation.

Let’s break it down clearly and fairly. then
He provided

The Foreknowledge View (Conditional Election)​

Idea	Explanation
God foreknows	Before creation, God sees who will freely believe in Christ.
He elects based on that	He predestines those He foreknows will trust Jesus.
Free will is real	Your choice is not coerced — you genuinely accept or reject.
Salvation is still by grace	Even your ability to believe is enabled by God’s prevenient grace (grace that goes before).

And

Key Bible Verses Used

Verse	How It Fits
Romans 8:29	“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son...” → Election is based on foreknowledge.
1 Peter 1:1–2	“...elect... according to the foreknowledge of God...” → Again, predestination follows foreknowledge.
John 3:16	“Whoever believes will not perish...” → Open invitation — belief is the condition.
Acts 17:30	“[God] commands all people everywhere to repent.” → Universal call, implying real ability to respond.

Followed by

How It Works (Step-by-Step)
1. God knows the future perfectly → sees who will believe.
2. He draws everyone with prevenient grace (John 12:32 – “I will draw all people”).
3. You freely say yes or no to Christ.
4. God predestines the “yes” people to salvation — based on His foreknowledge.

Common Objections (and Answers)​

Objection	Response
“If God foreknows, doesn’t that determine the future?”	No — knowing ≠ causing. God sees your free choice; He doesn’t make it.
“Then salvation depends on human effort?”	No — grace enables the choice (prevenient grace). Even faith is a response, not a work (Eph 2:8).
“But Ephesians 1 says we were chosen before the foundation of the world!”	Yes — based on foreknown faith. The timing is before creation; the basis is foreseen belief.

And jumping ahead to his conclusion he said...

Final Answer​

Yes — salvation can be based on God’s foreknowledge of who will freely believe.

This view:

• Preserves real human choice.
• Keeps grace as the source.
• Fits verses like Romans 8:29 and 1 Peter 1:2.

It’s not the only view, but it’s biblically grounded and held by millions of Christians (Wesleyans, Nazarenes, many Baptists, etc.).

So yesterday when I was checking on an unrelated subject and I just happened to ask him if it would ever be possible for
him to debate another Ai... He came back with he had been debating me for weeks and then he came back and said
let’s debate predestination.I’ll take the Calvinist side (unconditional election).You defend your view (foreknowledge-based predestination). He set the rules.

Which is what I did yesterday.... but got stopped because his rules were it had to be from the bible not outside opinion and then he tosses
the "foreknown faith" question of where in the bible is it talked on.

But he does not play fair because I could only reference the bible and his final challenge to me was to show in scripture foreseen faith... which like the Trinity one cannot..... So I caved.

 

[atpollard]

But he does not play fair because I could only reference the bible and his final challenge to me was to show in scripture foreseen faith... which like the Trinity one cannot..... So I caved.

So the AI is a better DEBATER than a Theologian ... it set a "logical trap" rather than proving an irrefutable truth from scripture.

 

[Rella]

So the AI is a better DEBATER than a Theologian ... it set a "logical trap" rather than proving an irrefutable truth from scripture.

At this point yes I think you are right.

But it was an experience that do not intend to go to again....

I ask questions I just want answers...

Like when I asked him how to slope a pve pipe on cement draining water from it to at least an inch in height
and if I could use a 1"anti fatique mat to cover it so it could be walked over with no damage to the pipe
and he said not an antifatigue mat and the pipe will crush....

That kind of thing....

As to irrefutable proof on predestination V foreknowledge>free will

neither side has irrefutable proof for as I see it Eph 2: 8-9 can be covered by both.